Say what you will, but implementing all manners of tags so users can express themselves, just to specifically leave out one is exclusion. "Move aside, heteros, this is our game!".
You can argue that they deserve it, that the developer has no obligations, that they are represented everywhere else and that they should play those game instead, but it remains exclusion.
As if she had no say on what her name is whatsoever! I personally always legally change my name whenever weirdos on the internet decide my name has suddenly bad connotations, I am at my 5th name this year and already looking for a new one.
As implied in my first comment, I'm luckily not a US citizen. So asking where my line would be is a bit weird.
But when there is a better option with any chance of winning, they would have my vote. But since the Palestinian Genocide is happening either way I'd vote this election, Dems it is to reduce the suffering inside the USA. Support is, to me, something different, and I don't think I would support the dems right now.
The Democrats and Republicans are both 99% Hitler, ergo voting for either is voting for the greater evil.
If you are a woman, POC or queer, it is usually really easy to choose a lesser evil here (or idk, a neo-nazi, as I framed this as why a non-voter might also help the democrats). Most people can choose a lesser evil, and they help the greater one by not voting/voting 3rd party. If you literally can't see a difference, that's fine, but this is the reason why most people are better of not voting 3rd party right now.
If the Democrats lose left wing voters by pushing rightward and lose, are they going to go even further right?
Yup, they can make that decision. Maybe they think appealing to the block of Republicans is easier, and I wouldn't be surprised if they do considering that's where their money is and how much they need to change to appeal to the left.
(...) may shift leftward to regain lost votes. Unconditionally supporting the Democrats only furthers their genocidal tendencies.
So, you don't know how it would help. Either the Democrats stay in Power and won't change, or the Republicans gain power and nothing will change until 2028 (or later, depending how project 2025 comes along). Hoping that they may change on Palestine is foolish. You are correct about the support, it should never be unconditional.
By your logic, Libertarians and Non-Voters are also helping Trump.
Whomever they think is the bigger evil, they help by not voting for the lesser evil. For why, see my first comment.
Depends on where they lost their votes from.
Disagree.
Kamala and Trump are united on Gaza, voting for either will only result in more death and destruction.
And voting for neither will also result in more death and destruction. You are refusing to explain how your choice would help, and I can make some damning assumptions why.
Leftists hate the dems and the reps, but now you are saying they help Trump by voting for their interests.
Correct. You seem to know all about the voting system, I don't need to explain to you why that is.
If the Dems lose votes to Leftists, and they wish to regain those votes, they have to move leftward. They won’t ever be Socialist, correct, but they move to where they lose votes.
They will move in the direction they think they can get more votes. The past has shown that even when they lose, they prefer to move "center" rather than left.
No, voting for genocide is not the best for Palestinian Genocide, unless you support the Genocide.
Please explain how voting for your alternative 3rd party candidate, sitting at 0.3% at the polls if I'm not mistaken, will help.
The part of them fiercely fighting any 3rd party was a good point though. Still, the Momentum isn't there.
Voting 3rd party is not and will not lead to revolution.
Nothing I said implies Democrats are entitled to any votes, just basic statements about options and their outcomes.
Because of the terrible voting system, all those voting for Jill Stein will not affect the outcome. Voting 3rd party is barely better than not voting at all. If they would have otherwise preferred the Democrats, this helps Trump.
I also don't think voting 3rd party will make Democrats adopt more leftist policies, as that risks losing centrist voters and their big business sponsors they rely on.
It's a shame, but the best vote is one for Harris. Even when it comes to the Palestinian Genocide. If you want more 3rd party options, try to win a local election first and build momentum from there, don't start with nothing 6 months before and try to win the federal election from there.
Really not that complicated. If a person who would otherwise vote Democrat instead votes 3rd party, it helps the Republicans. So the Democrat politician says it to that person. Likewise, the Republican says it to those that would otherwise vote Republican. Both parties now claim that it helps the other, but whom it really helps depends on who would otherwise be voted for.
From my outside, proportional representative having-position, 3rd party voting only becomes viable if it is discussed outside of the 6 months before an election. And not in the general "3rd party" term, but with an actual party name attached.
Are you describing yourself here or what?
You made a snarky comment, I made a snarky joke in the same vein, you decide to bring in statistics (of the wrong country btw)? Why?
"It's me, a 8mm Glock. I like to lie threatenly on tables and being pointed at minorities." What do you think, pretty convincing, right?
Much like the middle finger gesture is offensive because outside the US many people die to birds.
Apart from them straights not being a Monolith, I feel there is a difference between not being represented and being actively excluded. You know, one is bad and one is worse.
You can and should leave a "Need a ____ tag" at the forum then. Don't know why the article is so snarky about that, the poster of that seemed reasonable enough on the first 2 pages.